Neighboring Landowner Attitudes Regarding A Proposed Greenway Trail: Assessing Differences Between Adjacent and Nearby Residents
Bibliographic record
Abstract
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: In this exploratory study the beliefs of property owners in Cary, NC, were assessed regarding issues associated with a pro-posed greenway trail development within a quarter mile of their primary residence. Th e relationships of those beliefs to the individual’s attitude regarding proposed development near their primary residence were then evaluated. Belief dimensions investigated in this study were identifi ed through a review of the trail and greenway literature and incorporated aff ective, behavioral, and cognitive measures consistent with tripartite at-titude theory. Th is investigation of the beliefs underlying attitudes was undertaken to better understand the factors which negatively infl uence neighboring landowners ’ perceptions of greenway trail development. Fur-ther analysis was conducted which compared adjacent (shared property boundary) to nearby (located within one quarter mile) property owner be-liefs and attitudes. Consistent with previous research, all six belief dimen-sions (i.e., future property value, property damage, landowner liability, privacy, trespassing and crime) were signifi cantly related to neighboring landowners ’ overall attitudes toward proposed greenway trail development. Additionally, adjacent landowners were less supportive in their attitudes towards the proposed greenway trail than were nearby landowners. Th e future property value dimension was found to explain most of the vari-ance in global attitude toward greenway trail development. Th ese results suggest that agencies developing greenway trails should take steps to raise awareness of neighboring landowners regarding proposed projects and po-tential issues associated with living near greenway trails. Findings also in-dicate that the greenway trail planning process should include neighboring landowners so that their concerns may be voiced and properly addressed. 43
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".